Anchorage buys debt, page-144

Nick, intelligent discussion good to read.

I'd like to add there is an often overlooked dynamic in this whole situation. This is a not an 'ordinary' company in the overall scheme of companies.

It is an alternative business structure operating in the legal industry. Whereas, most companies are free to operate as they wish, or have wishes forced upon them, S&G is different.

Any new structure (owners) would need the approval of the Solicitors Regulatory Authority (in UK). A legal firm buying a legal firm (aka S&G buying the Quindell legal services bit) under normal circumstances is straightforward as there is continuity and it fits within the SRA interpretation for what an ABS should be maintaining integrity in the purpose of funding legal industry to service clients while controlled and funded by those with the legal industry code at heart.

If there was some underhand murky financial shifting and maneuvering to dismantle a current ABS licence only to resurrect under the guise of new owners that are essentially finance industry predators then I feel the SRA would take a dim view of it and possibly reject an application for an ongoing operating licence.

While nothing is insurmountable, the unique and in some quarters controversial nature of law firms owned by non-lawyers (ABS) would place layers of difficulty for changes in ownership both private and re-launching as public.

I've no idea what Anchorage intentions are. We should always have an opinion though or we are blind. Mine is it's nothing more than Anchorage seeing an opportunity, to profit from holding debt. When they get into it more they may even see profit in holding equity.

The whole business about Citi selling and the price they received is just throwing unwarranted fear into the equation. I can envisage many plausible reasons: broke their risk management rules must sell, possibly about to be embroiled in legal action and need to separate from the action, normal trading and they have some counter trade to offset...whatever the reason it is nothing to Citi. I imagine it is the equivalent of any 'common folk' accepting $498,000 instead of $500,000 for their house - immaterial.